A layoff is a termination of employment at the will of
the employer. It may be temporary or permanent and can occur for a
number of reasons including downsizing, changes in market conditions,
or new technology.

It is designed to give employees advance notice of the
layoff in order to find another job and/or seek retraining in a new
occupation and to give state dislocated-worker units adequate preparation
to assist affected workers.

Employers must comply with the WARN Act if they have
100 or more full-time employees or 100 or more employees, including
part-time employees, who regularly work a total of 4,000 hours per
week, exclusive of overtime. The Act defines “part-time employees”
as those who work an average of fewer than 20 hours per week or who
have been employed for fewer than 6 of the 12 months preceding the
date on which notice is required (29 U.S.C. Sec. 2101).

Temporary employees are individuals hired with the understanding
that their jobs will end when a specific project ends. Workers on
temporary layoff who have a reasonable expectation of recall are counted
as employees. An employee has a reasonable expectation of recall when
he or she understands, through notification or industry practice,
that his or her employment has been temporarily interrupted and that
he or she will be recalled to the same or a similar job (20 CFR Sec. 639.3). In addition, an employer may have several sites of employment
under common ownership or control, yet there is only one "employer"
for purposes of the Act.

Independent contractors and
subsidiaries. Independent contractors and subsidiaries
that are wholly or partially owned by a parent company may be considered
separate employers or part of the parent or contracting company depending
upon their degree of independence.

Some of the factors to be considered in making this determination
are (1) common ownership, (2) common directors and/or officers, (3) de facto exercise of control, (4) unity of personnel policies
emanating from a common source, and (5) the dependency of operations
(20 CFR Sec. 639.3).

Sale of the business. In the event of a sale of part or all of an employer's business,
the seller is responsible for providing notice of any plant closing
or mass layoff that takes place up to and including the effective
date of the sale, and the buyer is responsible for providing notice
of any plant closing or mass layoff that takes place after the effective
date of the sale (29 U.S.C. Sec. 2101).

A ruling from the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
illustrates this point (Phason v. Meridian Rail Corp., 479 F.3d 527
(7th Cir., 2007)). The court held that an employer that terminated
its employees 8 days before the formal sale of its business violated
the WARN Act. In mid-December, the seller notified its employees of
an impending change in ownership after it had shaken hands on the
deal. On December 31, the seller notified its workforce that it was
closing and invited its employees to apply for jobs with the buyer.
Days later, on January 8, the deal formally closed. The court rejected
the seller's argument that because it sold its business and the buyer
hired many of its workers, no employment loss occurred. The court
held that the seller violated the Act because it terminated its employees
before the formal closing of the sale, noting that a "handshake" is
not a sale of a business. Had the deal actually closed on December
31, the date of termination, the employees would not have had a claim
against the seller.

As a practical matter, employers should note that the
requirements of the WARN Act may be interpreted literally by the courts.
Therefore, employers should work closely with an employment law attorney
when planning and negotiating a business transaction.

Public employers. Regular federal, state, and local government entities that provide
public services are not covered by the Act (20 CFR Sec. 639.3).

Employees covered. Employees entitled to notice under the WARN Act include hourly and
salaried workers as well as managerial and supervisory employees.

Effect of state laws and collective
bargaining agreements. The WARN Act does not replace state
laws or collective bargaining agreements that may require additional
notice. Several states have enacted "mini-WARN" laws providing employees
with greater protections than the federal WARN Act. Employers should
check to see if their states of operation have any additional advance
notice requirements.

The law requires covered employers to give affected employees
60 days' notice of a “mass layoff ” or a “plant closing” that is expected
to last 6 months or longer.

Employers must also notify local government officials
and the appropriate state dislocated worker unit(s). Additional notice
is needed if the planned layoff date is extended. An employer may
not order a plant closing or mass layoff until the end of the 60-day
notice period and after the employer has served written notice of
such an order.

When all employees are not terminated on the same date,
the date of the first individual termination within the statutory
30-day or 90-day period triggers the 60-day notice requirement. A
worker's last day of employment is considered the date of that worker's
layoff. The first and each subsequent group of affected employees
is entitled to a full 60 days' notice. The point in time at which
the number of employees is to be measured for purposes of determining
coverage under the Act is the date on which the first notice is required
to be given (20
CFR Sec. 639.5).

Definitions. The
WARN Act defines the preceding terms as follows:

• "Mass layoff" is defined as a reduction in force that
(a) does not result from a plant closing, but (b) will result in an
employment loss at a single site of employment during any 30-day period
for (1) between 50 and 499 employees if they make up at least 33 percent
of the workforce (excluding part-time employees) or (2) at
least 500 employees (excluding any part-time employees).

• "Plant closing" is defined as a permanent or temporary
shutdown of a single site of employment, or one or more facilities
or operating units within a single site of employment, if the shutdown
results in an employment loss at the single site of employment for
50 or more employees, excluding part-time employees, during any 30
day period.

• "Employment loss" is defined as (1) an employment termination
other than a discharge for cause, voluntary departure, or retirement;
(2) a layoff exceeding 6 months; or (3) a reduction in work hours
of more than 50 percent during each month of any 6-month period.

Employment loss does not occur if the closing or
layoff is the result of the relocation or consolidation of part or
all of the employer's business and, before the closing or layoff,
(a) the employer offers to transfer the employee to a different site
within a reasonable commuting distance with no more than a 6-month
break in employment; or (b) the employer offers to transfer the employee
to any other site of employment regardless of distance with no more
than a 6-month break in employment and the employee accepts within
30 days of the offer or of the closing or layoff, whichever is later
(29 U.S.C. Sec.
2101).

Note: Employment
losses for two or more groups at a single site within a 90-day period,
each of which involves fewer than the minimum number of employees
to qualify as a plant closing or mass layoff but, in the aggregate,
do exceed the minimum number of employees, will be considered a mass
layoff or plant closing unless the employer can demonstrate
that there were two separate and distinct actions and there was no
attempt to evade the WARN Act requirements (29 U.S.C. Sec. 2102).

What is a single site of employment? According to federal regulations, a "single site of employment"
is either a single location or separate facilities that are in geographic
proximity, used for the same purpose, and that share staff and equipment
(20 CFR Sec.
639.3).

Interpreting these requirements, the 9th Circuit Court
of Appeals held that separate construction sites could not be considered
for purposes of determining whether an employer has enough employees
to be subject to the WARN Act (Bader v. Northern Line Layers Inc., 503 F.3d
813 (9th Cir. 2007)).

In this case, the employees claimed that their layoffs
violated the Act because there were more than 50 affected workers
and their employer's multiple jobsites should have been considered
along with its headquarters as a single site of employment. The court
rejected this argument because the sites were not geographically near
to the headquarters or each other, employees were not assigned to
the headquarters, their work was not assigned at the headquarters,
and the employees did not report to the headquarters.

What is significant is that if any of these factors were
different, the sites would have been considered part of a single site
of employment and the WARN Act would have applied. When considering
layoffs, employers should carefully consider any obligations they
may have under the law so that they do not unintentionally violate
it.

Determining whether a departure
was "voluntary." Two federal courts have interpreted the
meaning of a "voluntary departure." The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
held that if an employee leaves a job because the business is closing,
the employee has not voluntarily departed for purposes of the WARN
Act (Collins v. Gee West Seattle, 631 F.3d 1001 (9th
Cir. 2011)). (The 9th Circuit covers Alaska, Arizona, California,
Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.)

In this case, an employer with about 150 employees announced
that it would close down if it could not find a buyer within 11 days.
Following the announcement, employees stopped coming to work. With
only 30 employees reporting to work, the employer shut down 9 days
after its announcement. The employer argued that it was not required
to comply with the notice provisions of the WARN Act because all but
30 of its employees voluntarily departed before the closing. The court
disagreed, stating that unless there is evidence that employees left
for reasons other than the shutdown, it would be unreasonable to conclude
that they left voluntarily after being notified that the business
was closing.

In another case, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (covering
Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin) held that employees voluntarily
departed when they entered severance agreements following an announcement
that their employer would be shutting down operations (Ellis v. DHL Express, 633 F.3d 522 (7th Cir.
2011)).

The court held that even though some employees had only
2 days to consider whether to take the severance package, their departure
was still voluntary. The court noted that the employer did not harass
or pressure the employees to accept the severance agreement and it
did not provide them with incomplete information. Thus, these employees
were not counted for purposes of triggering the notice requirements
of the WARN Act.

Practice Tip: Employees
who stop coming to work when a plant closing is imminent may need
to be counted for purposes of determining if the WARN Act applies.
Under these circumstances, employers should consult with an experienced
employment law attorney in their jurisdiction for advice on their
obligations under the WARN Act or similar state law.

Extension of layoff period. When a layoff that was initially announced to be a layoff of 6 months
or less lasts more than 6 months, it is treated as an employment loss
unless:

• The extension to longer than 6 months was caused by a
business circumstance not reasonably foreseeable at the time of the
initial layoff; and

• Notice was given when it became reasonably foreseeable
that the layoff would last longer than 6 months (29 U.S.C. Sec. 2102).

Employers must provide different types of information
to employees depending upon whether or not they are unionized. Employers
must always notify the state. Notice may be sent by any method designed
to ensure receipt at least 60 days before separation, e.g., first-class
mail, personal delivery, or insertion of a notice into pay envelopes
(20 CFR
Sec. 639.6 to 639.8).

Union employees. If employees are unionized, only the chief elected union representative
must be given notice. The notice must contain:

• The name and address of the employment site where the
plant closing or mass layoff will occur and the name and telephone
number of a company official to contact for further information;

• A statement as to whether the planned action is expected
to be permanent or temporary and whether the entire plant is to be
closed;

• The expected date of the first separation and the anticipated
schedule for making separations; and

• The job titles of positions to be affected and the names
of workers currently holding these jobs.

Note: Unionized employers
should seek additional legal advice because the WARN Act and the National Labor Relations Act may have different notice
and bargaining requirements. The Supreme Court has ruled that unions
may sue on behalf of its members for WARN Act violations (United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 751
v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544 (1996)).

Nonunion employees. Employees who may reasonably be expected to experience an employment
loss and who are not represented by a union must be notified individually
in writing. While part-time employees are not counted in determining
if a plant closing or mass layoff had occurred, these workers must
get a notice if they will experience an employment loss. The notice
must include:

• A statement as to whether the planned action is expected
to be permanent or temporary and whether the entire plant is to be
closed;

• The expected date when the plant closing or mass layoff
will begin and the expected date when the individual employee will
be separated;

• An indication of whether bumping rights exist; and

• The name and telephone number of a company official to
contact for further information.

State notification. Employers must always notify the state dislocated worker unit and
the chief elected official of the local government unit within which
the closing or layoff will occur. The notice must include:

• The name and address of the employment site where the
plant closing or mass layoff will occur;

• The name and telephone number of a company official to
contact for further information;

• The nature of the planned action, including whether it
is a plant closing or a mass layoff and whether it is expected to
be permanent or temporary;

• The expected date of the first separation and the anticipated
schedule for making separations;

• The job titles of positions to be affected and the number
of employees in each job classification;

• An indication of whether or not bumping rights exist; and

• The name of each union representing affected employees
and the name and address of the chief elected officer of each union.

• The closing or layoff is the result of the completion
of a particular project when the employees involved were hired with
the understanding that employment was limited to the duration of the
facility or the project; or

Additionally, there are three other important exceptions
to the 60 days' notice requirement that are explained in the U.S.
Department of Labor's regulations interpreting the WARN Act (20 CFR 639.9). Employers
claiming these exemptions are required to give as much notice as they
can, along with a brief statement of why the notification period has
been reduced. The employer has the burden of proving that the conditions
for an exception have been met. These exceptions are:

• The faltering company exception;

• The unforeseen business circumstances exception; and

• The natural disaster exception.

Faltering company exception. The faltering company exception, which is narrowly construed, applies
only to plant closings and not mass layoffs. In order for it to apply,
the employer must have been actively seeking capital or business,
at the time notice would have been required, that was realistically
obtainable and, if obtained, would have allowed the employer to avoid
or postpone the shutdown.

In addition, the employer must have reasonably and in
good faith believed that giving the required notice would have prevented
the employer from obtaining the financing or business. This means
that the employer must be able to objectively show that it believed
that a potential customer or source of financing would have been unwilling
to provide business or financing to the new business if the public
knew that there might be a closing.

Practice tip: One
way to satisfy the faltering company exception is by showing that
the finance or business source would not choose to do business with
a troubled company or with a company whose workforce would be looking
for other jobs.

Note: This exception
will be viewed in a companywide context, so a company with access
to financing or with cash reserves may not use it based solely on
the financial condition of the plant that is being closed.

Unforeseen business circumstances
exception. This exception applies to plant closings and
mass layoffs caused by business circumstances that were not reasonably
foreseeable at the time that the 60-day notice would have been required.
An important indicator that a circumstance is not reasonably foreseeable
is that it is caused by some sudden, dramatic, and unexpected action
or condition outside the employer's control.

Examples include a principal client's sudden termination
of a major contract, a strike at a major supplier, or an unexpected
and dramatic economic downturn. The test for determining when circumstances
are reasonably foreseeable focuses on an employer's business judgment.
The employer must exercise the same commercially reasonable business
judgment that a similarly situated employer would in predicting the
demands of its particular market. The employer, however, does not
have to accurately predict general economic conditions.

Government actions. A government-ordered closing of an employment site that occurs without
prior notice may also fall under the unforeseen business circumstances
exception. An employer may also not be held liable under the Act for
a government ordered mass layoff (Deveraturda v. Globe Aviation Security Services, 454 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2006)).

Natural disaster exception. This exemption applies to plant closings and mass layoffs due to
any form of a natural disaster. Examples include floods, earthquakes,
droughts, storms, tidal waves or tsunamis, and similar events. The
employer must be able to demonstrate that its plant closing or mass
layoff was in fact due to the natural disaster. While a disaster may
preclude full notice, as much notice as possible must be given. Plant
closings or layoffs that are the indirect result of a natural disaster
are not covered by this exception, but may fall under the unforeseen
business circumstances exception.

Any employer that violates the Act's notice requirements
may be liable to each affected employee who suffers an employment
loss. An aggrieved employee may claim back pay for each day of the
violation period in an amount equal to his or her average regular
rate for the previous 3 years or final regular rate. The employer
may also be held liable for lost benefits and be subject to a civil
fine of up to $500 for each day it is in violation of the Act.

Damages paid to any aggrieved employee will be reduced
by any wages paid by the employer to the employee during the violation
period, any voluntary and unconditional payment by the employer to
the employee that is not required by some legal obligation, and any
payment by the employer to a third party or trustee on behalf of the
employee during the violation period (29 U.S.C. Sec. 2104).

Computation of damages. The damages an employer may have to pay if it violates the WARN Act
have been the subject of several court cases. The majority of federal
circuit courts of appeal have ruled that employers are liable for
each "work" day within the violation period.

However, the 3rd Circuit has held that employers are
liable for each "calendar" day during the violation period. At least
one court has held that back pay includes tips and holiday pay that
employees would have earned had they been working (Local Joint Executive Board of Culinary/Bartender Trust
Fund v. Las Vegas Sands, Inc., 244 F.3d 1152 (9th Cir. 2001)).
In the same case, the court held that WARN Act damages may not be
reduced by severance pay or accrued vacation pay that the employer
was otherwise obligated to pay.

Waivers. Employers
often ask their employees to sign releases waiving their rights under
the WARN Act in return for additional consideration. The Department
of Labor (DOL) has stated that employees cannot be required to waive
their right to the WARN Act notice. However, employees may agree to
waive their rights to make claims against the employer. DOL has published
an employer's guide to the WARN Act that can be accessed at http://www.doleta.gov.

In some cases, employers can avoid layoffs by instituting
other cost-cutting measures so that the financial burden of an economic
downturn is shared among employees. Employees benefit despite the
hardship of reduced hours and/or pay, because they are able to keep
their jobs. Employers also benefit by maintaining a well-trained workforce
ready to resume maximum production or service levels when the economy
improves. Additionally, when employers try to avoid layoffs, they
often gain the goodwill and loyalty of their employees. Examples of
alternatives to layoffs include:

• Work sharing;

• Reduced pay;

• Furloughs;

• Reduced benefits; and

• Early retirement.

Work sharing. Work
sharing allows employees to share the work that remains after some
jobs are lost due to adverse economic conditions. Under a work-sharing
arrangement, employees may work a reduced week or work every other
week. Their hourly pay remains the same but reflects the reduced hours.
In some states, the unemployment compensation laws allow employees
to collect partial unemployment benefits during a work-sharing period.

Reduced pay. A reduction
in pay works best if it is shared by all employees, including management.
It may be acceptable to employees if their unemployment benefits during
a period of layoff would be less than the reduced pay.

Furloughs. Employers
can require employees to take unpaid time off—either a few days or
a full week or more. In the absence of a state law to the contrary,
employers may allow or require furloughed employees to use vacation
or PTO time. Sometimes, employers will temporarily shut down a facility,
thereby saving not only wages but energy and other administrative
costs as well.

Caution: Work sharing,
reduced pay, furloughs, and shutdowns may jeopardize employees' exempt
status. Exempt employees are not subject to minimum wage and overtime
laws. Under federal law, most exempt employees must be paid on a salary
basis, which means they must be paid the same salary if they work any part of a workweek,
regardless of the quantity or quality of their work.

Instituting a furlough or temporary shutdown without
jeopardizing an employee's exempt status can be particularly challenging
for employers. However, if an employer sets up a weeklong furlough
or shutdown and does not pay exempt employees, there is no risk of
losing the employees’ exempt status. This is because the wage and
hour regulations provide that exempt employees need not be paid for
any workweek in which they perform no work. On the other hand, if
an employee sets up a partial-week furlough and deducts the pay of
exempt employees for the furlough days, those employees are at risk
of losing their exempt status and may be entitled to overtime.

Also, it is critical that employees perform no work at
all during a furlough or shutdown, including checking work e-mails,
making business phone calls, etc. Remember, nonexempt employees must
be paid for hours worked, and as noted above, exempt employees must
be paid their full salary for any week in which they perform any work. To ensure that no work is performed during a furlough or shutdown,
many employers require employees to turn in their personal digital
assistants, laptops, and other employer-owned communication devices
before they leave.

Reduced benefits. Sometimes,
employers can cut costs by reducing employee benefits. For example,
employers may eliminate or reduce their contribution to employees'
401(k) plans. Employers' options in this area may be limited if there
is a union contract or other employment contract in place. Employers
must also make sure that they comply with the requirements of ERISA.
Please see the
national ERISA
section.

Early retirement. Employers
can reduce their workforce by offering attractive incentives to employees
who are about to reach retirement age. The advantage of retirement
incentives is that they allow employers to cut costs without requiring
employees to leave their jobs involuntarily. However, the employer
may lose some employees it would prefer to keep.

Employers should always avoid unlawful discrimination
when considering layoffs. Each layoff decision should be made according
to objective, business-related criteria and be well-documented.

Once an employer has determined that a layoff is necessary,
it should identify the supervisors who will facilitate the layoff.
These supervisors should be directed to select employees for layoff
on the basis of nondiscriminatory criteria such as job performance,
employee skills, or seniority. Additionally, the selection should
be made with any policies or employment contracts in mind. Note that
the EEOC has stated that if productivity is a layoff criterion, disabled
employees cannot be penalized if their productivity has been negatively
affected as a result of an accommodation.

After the employees have been selected for layoff, a
statistical analysis should be done to determine if the layoff would
have a disparate impact on employees within a protected group (race,
gender, national origin, workers over the age of 40, etc.). If so,
the selections should be reexamined. Remember, the employer may be
required to show that a business necessity justifies the criteria
that have a disparate impact on a protected group.
Please see the
National Civil Rights, National Age Discrimination, National Disabilities (ADA)
sections.

An employer may lay off an employee who is out of work
on short-term disability, even in cases when the leave is qualified
under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The issue is whether the employee would have been selected for layoff
if he or she was not out of work on disability. Therefore, the employer
should make sure the reasons for selecting this employee are job-related
and well documented.

In addition, if this is the only employee selected for
layoff in a unit or at a facility and there are others in similar
jobs not being laid off, the employer is vulnerable to a claim that
this employee was selected because he or she was exercising rights
under the FMLA, workers' compensation, or other leave law.

Employers instituting layoffs must be particularly careful
if they employ foreign workers. Depending on the type of visa, employers
may need to notify the Department of Labor or the U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Service of layoffs, reduced hours, or reduced pay.

For example, if an employee with an H-1B visa (for persons
with special areas of expertise, such as engineers and computer scientists)
is paid less than the amount indicated on his or her Labor Condition
Application, the employer may be liable for back pay and civil penalties.
If an H-1B worker is discharged as part of a layoff, the employer
may be responsible for the worker's transportation home.

There are several different types of visas for foreign
workers, each with its own rules and regulations. Therefore, employers
with foreign workers should consult with experienced counsel when
considering a layoff that will include foreign workers.
Please see the
national Visas
section.

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act (COBRA) requires employers with 20 or
more employees to offer continued group health insurance after terminations
for any of a number of reasons, including some layoffs. State continuation
laws may provide additional rights.
Please see the
national Health Insurance Continuation/COBRA
section.

As a matter of goodwill, some companies provide outplacement
services to laid-off employees. Outplacement counseling is designed
to help terminated employees prepare themselves for a new job or a
new career, to lend assistance in providing outside resources, to
receive training, and to help employees cope with the stress of leaving
the company.

Outplacement services include assistance in rewriting
resumes, job placements, career counseling, conducting employee skill
surveys, and providing pre-layoff employment service registration.
Larger organizations may hire outplacement services to assist employees,
whereas smaller organizations may hire a single counselor or use existing
resources to assist employees. Employers should consider providing
outplacement services if employees have been working at the same company
for a long period of time and may not have the tools necessary to
successfully find another job.

Severance benefits are payments made to employees upon
termination of employment caused by events that are beyond their control,
such as workforce reductions, plant closings, company takeovers, and
mergers. Severance benefits are not required by federal law and are
only required by a handful of states.

However, many companies do offer severance pay. The payments
themselves may be paid in a lump sum or over a period of time. These
benefits are usually calculated by the employee's length of service
with the company (e.g., 1 week of severance pay given for every year
employed with the company).
Please see the
national Severance Pay
section.

Most states have laws regarding when final paychecks
must be given to terminated employees. Some states specify when laid-off
employees must be paid. Employers need to make sure that they are
aware of these laws when conducting a layoff.

Regulations issued under the Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) specifically address an employer's obligations in the event of a
layoff or reduction in force. The regulations provide:

• If an employee is laid off with recall rights, he or
she is still an employee for purposes of USERRA. If the employee is
on layoff and begins service in the uniformed services or is laid
off while performing service, he or she may be entitled to reemployment
on return if the employer would have recalled the employee to employment
during the period of service.

• If the employee is sent a recall notice during a period
of service in the uniformed services and cannot resume the position
of employment because of the service, he or she remains an employee
for purposes of USERRA. As a result, if the employee is otherwise
eligible, he or she is entitled to reemployment following the conclusion
of the period of service even if he or she did not respond to the
recall notice.

• If the employee is laid off before or during service
in the uniformed services, and the employer would not have recalled
him or her during that period of service, the employee is not entitled
to reemployment following the period of service simply because he
or she is a covered employee. This is because reemployment rights
under USERRA cannot put the employee in a better position than if
he or she had remained in civilian employment (20 CFR Part 1002.42).
Please see the
national Military Service (USERRA)
section.

Shortly after a layoff is completed, management should
inform remaining employees why the layoffs were necessary. An employer's
honesty will be appreciated by employees; if further layoffs are possible,
say so. Additionally, employers should acknowledge the extra effort
that may be required of the remaining employees.

Layoff survivors may be experiencing a range of sometimes
conflicting emotions such as relief, guilt, insecurity, distrust of
management, anxiety, and a lack of motivation. It is important for
employers to make sure that layoff survivors know that they are valued
employees and to help them stay engaged and productive. Managers should
be available to discuss the concerns of layoff survivors. In some
situations, it may be appropriate to refer layoff survivors to the
organization's employee assistance program.

A collective bargaining agreement may mandate the order
of rehiring after a layoff. Otherwise, employers usually rehire employees
in reverse order of layoff. Problems may arise if employers rehire
out of order, if employees choose to remain on layoff status rather
than accept a lower-paying job, or if employees are kept on recall
status for too long a period of time. Employers may want to limit
the eligibility period for rehiring. Staying in touch with laid-off
employees and establishing clear procedures for recall and reporting
back to work will help the rehiring process run more smoothly.

Effective July 1, 2015, the Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)superseded the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). Like its predecessor, the
WIOA is a federal workforce development law that provides for state
and federal employment, education, job-training, and support services.
The law is designed to help jobseekers access employment, education,
training, and support services and to match employers with the skilled
workers they need.

The WIOA is intended to develop strong
regional economies. In line with this goal, state and local governments
have primary responsibility for implementing all programs. State governors
must designate local workforce investment areas and oversee local
workforce investment boards with the following goals in mind:

• Work up front with employers to determine local or regional
hiring needs and design training programs that are responsive to those
needs;

• Make better use of data to drive accountability, inform
what programs are offered and what is taught, and offer user-friendly
information for jobseekers to choose what programs and pathways work
for them and are likely to result in a job;

• Measure and evaluate employment and earnings outcomes;

• Promote a seamless progression from one educational stepping
stone to another, and across work-based training and education, so
individuals' efforts result in progress;

• Break down barriers to accessing job-driven training
and hiring for any American who is willing to work, including access
to supportive services and relevant guidance; and

Additional
information on WIOA implementation, including links to guidance, technical
assistance events, and tools, are available on the Employment and
Training Administration's WIOA Resource Page at www.doleta.gov/WIOA .

American Job Center
"One Stop" Approach. The cornerstone of the WIA was the
"One Stop" service delivery system, which was designed to make information
about and access to a wide array of job training, education, and employment
services available for workers and employers at a single neighborhood
location. The WIOA supports and further streamlines this one-stop
career service approach.

Through these one-stop American Job Centers,
employers have a single point of contact to provide information about
current and future skills their workers need to possess and to list
job openings. More information on American Job Centers is available
at http://www.careeronestop.org

Missouri follows the requirements of the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN Act). The WARN Act imposes restrictions on the way layoffs are handled.
It is designed to give employees advance notice of a layoff in order
to find another job or to seek retraining in a new occupation and
to give the state adequate preparation to assist the affected workers.

Comprehensive information on the WARN Act is available.
Please see the
national Layoff
section.

The Electronic Mass Claims Filing system is designed
to assist employers and their employees during a temporary mass layoff.
Employee information provided by the employer allows the Division
of Employment Security to quickly and efficiently file unemployment
insurance claims. This filing method is available when at least 20
workers become totally unemployed.

To use this filing method, the temporary layoff cannot
exceed 8 consecutive weeks. For more information, visit labor.mo.gov/DES.

The Division of Employment Security has instituted the
Shared Work Unemployment Compensation Program, which is designed to
help employers and employees and is an alternative to layoffs for
employers faced with a reduction in available work. It allows an employer
to divide the available work or hours of work among a specified group
of affected employees in lieu of a layoff, and it allows the employees
to receive a portion of their unemployment benefits while working
reduced hours.

To participate, an employer must reduce the normal weekly
hours of work for an employee in the affected unit by at least 20
percent (but not more than 40 percent) and the plan must apply to
at least 10 percent of the employees in the affected unit who meet
monetary requirements for regular unemployment compensation. If the
plan is approved by the Division, workers who qualify for unemployment
benefits would receive both wages and Shared Work benefits. The Shared
Work benefits would be that percentage of regular unemployment benefits
that matches the reduction described in the employer's plan.

The Division may approve a Shared Work Plan if:

• There is an "affected unit" of three or more employees;

• The normal weekly hours of work and corresponding wages
for a participating employee are reduced in the plan by no less than
20 percent and no more than 40 percent;

• The plan applies to at least 10 percent of the employees
in the affected unit;

• The employer certifies that the fringe benefits provided
will remain the same as if their normal hours had not been reduced,
or to the same extent as other employees not participating in the
Shared Work Program;

• The employer certifies that the implementation of a Shared
Work Plan and the resulting reduction in work hours is in lieu of
a temporary layoff that would affect at least 10 percent of the employees
in the affected unit and that would result in an equivalent reduction
in work hours. and

• The employer has submitted all quarterly contribution
and wage reports required to be filed for all past and current periods,
and has paid all taxes due for all past and current periods.

For more information on the Shared Work Program, including
how to obtain an application, see labor.mo.gov/DES.

Additional information is also available on general unemployment
compensation matters.